The stimulus is working!

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by scottw

that's just American scientists...but go ahead and find a way to dismiss them all....they're probably all idiots...right Spence and JD?

Never said that. I said having a PhD doesn't make you a definitive source. Hell, there is a whole list of reputable scientists that either think Global Warming is not happening, is a natural occurrence, or could possibly benefit us.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...global_warming

Keep in mind, there was also a laundry list of scientists that argued man would never walk on the moon or develop a cure for cancer (we're pretty darn close).

However, people that use this as evidence against climate change *are* idiots. "It was 46 degrees outside last night in the middle of July. There's no way Global Warming exists."

[scottw]

RECORD COLD IN THE ERA OF GLOBAL WARMING

NEW ZEALAND

May the coldest on record, Niwa figures show
Matt Stewart | 10th July 2009

Wairarapa certainly played its part in the record-breaking chill that gripped the country during May, with Martinborough plunged into gloom courtesy of a paltry 92 hours of sunshine.

Niwa senior climate scientist Georgina Griffiths said May "broke records from one end of the country to the other - it was the coldest May on record", and there was nothing much to toast in the South Wairarapa wine village, which registered 69 percent of normal sunshine hours for May - the lowest figure for the town since records began.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by scottw

RECORD COLD IN THE ERA OF GLOBAL WARMING NEW ZEALAND

THIS IS A MEDIA ARTICLE.

read the G-D Science, not the frigging new-press reworded garbage.
The scientists quoted would probably never say that it was 'Record cold in the middle of global warming' He would say that there is WEATHER and CLIMATE.

Pick up and read "The Long Thaw" by David Archer or "Our Threatened Oceans" by Stefan Rahmstorf... or "The Two Mile Time Machine" by Richard Alley... those are books written by scientists, NOT writers writing about science, but actual Scientists (novel idea, huh?). Go to realclimate.org and read actual scientists opinions and debates on relevant topics.

Archer is the Preeminent climate modeler in the world, and Rahmstorf is one of the leading experts on Sea level rise and physical oceanography. His work shows that the IPCC models from 10-20 years ago are actually pretty damn accurate based on satellite altimetery measurements of sea-level rise. Richard Alley is one of the big time-guys in everything ice core and big-picture climatology/glaciology. .


Read them as a skeptic, read them as a non-believer, whatever.
they will open your eyes. If these books at the very least don't open your eyes to the possibility that we have an impact to the future of our planet and natural resources, then your own predispositions are clouding your mind, Period.

Until 4 or 5 years ago, I was a skeptic when it came to human induced climate change... then I read the science... Do I believe that the world will end at 2deg C above present temperatures? Nope, but I do believe that it will have significant consequences to our way of life, agriculture, water resources and even fish/marine (read fish, lobsters etc..) life.

Let me ask this:
Increasing CO2 in the oceans as almost, absolutely been shown to have a deleterious effect on coral and other Carbonate marine organisms... the oceans are huge, how can we raise CO2 and cause this, we have no impact... oh right, the coral bleaching and weakened shells of certain mollusks and bivalves in recent decades is all a lie... or, the science is wrong, there are tons of fish, little old us can't have a big impact on overfishing...

I would believe most scientists are neither optimists or pessimists. the data shows what it shows, and while there is a certain amount of 'if I hadn't of believed it, I wouldn't have seen it' A GOOD scientist keeps his mind open to other explanations. They should not and usually do not have some ill-founded predisposition to a political ideology. Do some? of course, we are human.

And for the record, healthy debate is a good thing, going around in circles is not. All the issues you raised above, especially sunspots, were further study when that hypothesis had lots of backers, and found there is not a direct link to climate and sunspots, and while there is a 1500year cycle, it is strongest during the glacial stages, and hasn;t been overly prevalent in the last 6,000 years or so.

then again, what the %$%$%$%$ do I know, right.

Until people post the science, preferably from a peer reviewed journal, to go with their posts on climate change, I'm done. That is healthy debate. Posting random news clip is bull%$%$%$%$. I can probably find a newspaper or blog that blames it all on the world being flat and the center of the universe. Then again there are plenty that don't believe the earth is more than 7,000 years old...

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

then again, what the %$%$%$%$ do I know, right.

Yea, what do you know?

If I need an expert on shallow marine benthic geologic habitats I know I can call you.

But what does global warming have to do with the ocean floor? Nothing? I thought so

Perhaps a more important questions is, what does the microtidal coast look like in NEW ZEALAND? Or more importantly, what are New Zealanders wearing this time of year?

It should be warm so if they're wearing sweaters or polar fleece Global Warming must be a fraud. Then again, if they're wearing shirts it's possible there's a short term trend towards warmth so Global Warming must be a fraud.

-spence

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by spence

Yea, what do you know?
If I need an expert on shallow marine benthic geologic habitats I know I can call you.
-spence

What did you do, google me?

[scottw]

read your posts idiots...I highlighted yours if red Johnny, geeze

JD... "However, people that use this as evidence against climate change *are* idiots. "

SPENCE..."Only an idiot would measure climate change with a 10 year sample, or perhaps someone out to ignore science and make a political point."

Johnny you routinely roll with he "most people are ....(fill in the derrogatory slur)
and Spence's arrogant condecension is unmatched and remarkably boring...

with you two it's always the same thing, you make quite a couple


this was written for you two...

July 10, 2009
The Audacity of Conceit
By Victor Volsky

Intelligent idiots, smart fools, multi-degreed morons - lots of monikers could describe a category of individuals dismayingly prominent in the ruling elites of the West. They are the people so divorced from reality, so engrossed in bookish pursuits that - for all their undoubted intellectual accomplishments and often as a direct consequence thereof - they invariably end up with egg on their faces whenever they try to engage in practical activities.


Worse yet, they idolize each other, sticking up for one another out of class solidarity.

If the people who formulate the administration's economic policy are so smart, why is it so disastrous? Last January, these wizards of smart predicted that if Obama's stimulus package were passed, the unemployment rate would not go beyond 8 percent by the end of the year. At this point, it is nearing 10 percent and shows no sign of slowing down. How could they be so wrong with their vaunted brilliance?


It is a common mistake of intellectuals to confuse IQ with common sense and verbal fluency with leadership qualities. They are simply unable to comprehend that academic success does not necessarily translate into a firm grasp on reality; the knack for endlessly bloviating on an abstruse subject does not automatically imply administrative ability; an academic degree is not a substitute for practical experience; and a professors' lounge is not a corporate boardroom.


Nobody would deny that the members of Obama's circle of economic advisors are indeed academically adept, well-spoken men and women. But have any of them ever run a lemonade stand, much less a bona fide business? Have they ever met a payroll? Do they know what it means to toss and turn in bed, worrying over the coming rise in vendor prices? They may have academic theories and marshal vast amounts of data, but have little practical knowledge of how things work in the real world.


So what do they bring to the administration other than long resumes and fearsome reputations as intellectual polemicists? All these brilliant academics have been brought on board for the sole purpose of lending an intellectual veneer to Obama's political schemes and validate his power grab. Hence the pitiful sight of these noted intellectuals being trotted out to the microphones to bleat pathetically in defense of the administration's agenda.

Karl Marx memorably said that history repeats itself, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce. Obama's economic policy, which amounts to an all-out assault on the U.S. economy, repeats history as a farce -- which would be hilarious, if we didn't have to live with the consequences.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by scottw

read your posts idiots...I highlighted yours if red Johnny, geeze

JD... "However, people that use this as evidence against climate change *are* idiots. "

SPENCE..."Only an idiot would measure climate change with a 10 year sample, or perhaps someone out to ignore science and make a political point."

Johnny you routinely roll with he "most people are ....(fill in the derrogatory slur)
and Spence's arrogant condecension is unmatched and remarkably boring...

You are delusional. And quite skilled at taking things out of context in a poor attempt to further your baseless points. You should go back to copy/pasting other people's ideas.

People who make a simple observation and use that as evidence for or against global warming (or climate change) are idiots. It's not a matter of if they agree with me or not.

Interestingly, I haven't once actually stated in this thread what my opinion on climate change is.

Originally Posted by scottw

this was written for you two...

July 10, 2009
The Audacity of Conceit
By Victor Volsky

Intelligent idiots, smart fools, multi-degreed morons - lots of monikers could describe a category of individuals dismayingly prominent in the ruling elites of the West. They are the people so divorced from reality, so engrossed in bookish pursuits that - for all their undoubted intellectual accomplishments and often as a direct consequence thereof - they invariably end up with egg on their faces whenever they try to engage in practical activities.

Yet you find it appropriate to cite "there are an awful lot of PHD idiots running around that dipute this data and 'SCIENCE'," as though having a PHD automatically makes someone an authority. If a PhD is a "muti-degreed moron" and "divorced from reality", what does that make someone like you who mindlessly follows what they say?

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by scottw

July 10, 2009
The Audacity of Conceit
By Victor Volsky

Intelligent idiots, smart fools, multi-degreed morons - lots of monikers could describe a category of individuals dismayingly prominent in the ruling elites of the West. They are the people so divorced from reality, so engrossed in bookish pursuits that - for all their undoubted intellectual accomplishments and often as a direct consequence thereof - they invariably end up with egg on their faces whenever they try to engage in practical activities.

I like that.

Book learning is great, but unless tempered with experience and
wisdom it only offers a very small part of a person's intellect.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

THIS IS A MEDIA ARTICLE.

read the G-D Science, not the frigging new-press reworded garbage.
The scientists quoted would probably never say that it was 'Record cold in the middle of global warming' He would say that there is WEATHER and CLIMATE.

Pick up and read "The Long Thaw" by David Archer or "Our Threatened Oceans" by Stefan Rahmstorf... or "The Two Mile Time Machine" by Richard Alley... those are books written by scientists, NOT writers writing about science, but actual Scientists (novel idea, huh?). Go to realclimate.org and read actual scientists opinions and debates on relevant topics.

Archer is the Preeminent climate modeler in the world, and Rahmstorf is one of the leading experts on Sea level rise and physical oceanography. His work shows that the IPCC models from 10-20 years ago are actually pretty damn accurate based on satellite altimetery measurements of sea-level rise. Richard Alley is one of the big time-guys in everything ice core and big-picture climatology/glaciology. .


Read them as a skeptic, read them as a non-believer, whatever.
they will open your eyes. If these books at the very least don't open your eyes to the possibility that we have an impact to the future of our planet and natural resources, then your own predispositions are clouding your mind, Period.

Until 4 or 5 years ago, I was a skeptic when it came to human induced climate change... then I read the science... Do I believe that the world will end at 2deg C above present temperatures? Nope, but I do believe that it will have significant consequences to our way of life, agriculture, water resources and even fish/marine (read fish, lobsters etc..) life.

Let me ask this:
Increasing CO2 in the oceans as almost, absolutely been shown to have a deleterious effect on coral and other Carbonate marine organisms... the oceans are huge, how can we raise CO2 and cause this, we have no impact... oh right, the coral bleaching and weakened shells of certain mollusks and bivalves in recent decades is all a lie... or, the science is wrong, there are tons of fish, little old us can't have a big impact on overfishing...

I would believe most scientists are neither optimists or pessimists. the data shows what it shows, and while there is a certain amount of 'if I hadn't of believed it, I wouldn't have seen it' A GOOD scientist keeps his mind open to other explanations. They should not and usually do not have some ill-founded predisposition to a political ideology. Do some? of course, we are human.

And for the record, healthy debate is a good thing, going around in circles is not. All the issues you raised above, especially sunspots, were further study when that hypothesis had lots of backers, and found there is not a direct link to climate and sunspots, and while there is a 1500year cycle, it is strongest during the glacial stages, and hasn;t been overly prevalent in the last 6,000 years or so.

then again, what the %$%$%$%$ do I know, right.

Until people post the science, preferably from a peer reviewed journal, to go with their posts on climate change, I'm done. That is healthy debate. Posting random news clip is bull%$%$%$%$. I can probably find a newspaper or blog that blames it all on the world being flat and the center of the universe. Then again there are plenty that don't believe the earth is more than 7,000 years old...

everyone you listed is on George Soros' payroll..

[scottw]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Keep in mind, there was also a laundry list of scientists that argued man would never walk on the moon or develop a cure for cancer (we're pretty darn close).

However, people that use this as evidence against climate change *are* idiots. "It was 46 degrees outside last night in the middle of July. There's no way Global Warming exists."

name one...I would think that most scientist are optimists and WOULD believe that cures for cancer exist and that man COULD walk on the moon, where the hell do you get that, again, NAME ONE...another straw dog...you and Spence constantly declare those that disagree with you are non-thinking idiots...really not very nice if you ask me

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by scottw

name one...I would think that most scientist are optimists and WOULD believe that cures for cancer exist and that man COULD walk on the moon, where the hell do you get that, again, NAME ONE...another straw dog...you and Spence constantly declare those that disagree with you are non-thinking idiots...really not very nice if you ask me

For one, please cite some examples of me calling someone an idiot merely because they disagree with me.

Second, I was saying that people that say things like, "there can't be global warming, look how cold it has been this summer" are idiots.

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

you and Spence constantly declare those that disagree with you are non-thinking idiots...really not very nice if you ask me

And again he resorts to placing words in people's mouths.

Never said such a thing, read my posts again.

-spence

[scottw]

so what you are saying is that you both referred to people that disagree with you as IDIOTS(which you both did) in this thread but neither of you ever called anyone an idiot for disagreeing with you....I think I'm starting to figure you two out.... and...Obama was clearly not checking out that little girls ass...but if he was, it's perfectly OK ....

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by scottw

so what you are saying is that you both referred to people that disagree with you as IDIOTS(which you both did) in this thread

One again, where exactly?

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

One again, where exactly?

I don't see it.

Unless ScottW agrees that his logic is idiotic and is feeling tremendously guilty for it.

-spence